OpenSource Connections
Category: Uncategorized
When we presented at the AFEI DoD Open conference in November, we noticed that there was a lot of talk about the Department of Defense adopting open source technologies. Having not attended DoD Opens 1 and 2, I cannot say if there was progress towards actual adoption rather than a trend of continued talk and little action, but I was surprised at the basic level of education that seemed to need to still occur.
nn
Comparatively speaking, it seems that perhaps the U.S. government is behind the times in open source adoption. Australian agencies view adoption of open source as a positive trend. The Dutch government will adopt open source software as a standard by April 2008. The government of VietNam has “recommended government agencies use open source software when using state moneys to implement information technology projects.” Local governments in Europe are moving to open source, as they realize the constraints of licensing, including this example of an expiring license in Thanet (thanks to the article “Open Source For Local Government Debate” for pointing out the example).
nnnn
As John Weathersby of the Open Source Software Institute points out in this interview, federal government adoption of open source software has a positive trickle down effect on state and local governments, but the flow is still just a trickle. The adoption is not as vibrant as the FOSS community believes it should be, and only now are many of the open source initiatives ramping up their efforts to expose the benefits of FOSS to the government (and in particular, the Department of Defense).
nn
Why are smaller governments seemingly ahead of the game in open source adoption when the U.S. government lags behind? I believe the comparisons between small and large businesses are apt here:
nn
- n
- Open source technologies have a lower total cost of ownership When a small business or government has to make purchasing decisions, then opportunity costs weigh in less heavily than actual costs. In the case of small governments, limited revenues means having to forego the big iron system and try to find a cheaper equivalent. Oftentimes, open source platforms and projects make this choice possible.
- Smaller organizations are usually more nimble than larger organizations With fewer layers of bureaucracy to get through, smaller organizations can more quickly adopt new and changing technologies. When a new open source project comes out or starts to gain adoption, a smaller organization can move to it more nimbly and widespread adoption becomes much easier.
- Vendor lock Larger organizations get the attention of the sales representatives who then push for long-term licenses and contractual agreements. Smaller organizations do not get such attention, and, therefore, have a lower switching cost because the effort of retaining those customers does not justify the benefits. Furthermore, as organizations use more and more non-proprietary solutions, the vendor lock issue becomes equivalently reduced.
- A lack of resources to invent internally Smaller organizations cannot dedicate staff and resources to build home-grown solutions to their needs. They must adapt and adopt because of the costs required to build something internally. Thus, from an earlier time, they are more comfortable with the notion of open source systems and are not as reliant on external vendors to provide packaged solutions.
n
n
n
n
nn
So, is the U.S. government missing the boat? Not yet. It is, after all, a large organization with vast resources. However, over time, failure to adopt will mean that the U.S. has to pay incrementally more for the same outcomes that others get through the use of FOSS. In a time when U.S. hegemony is starting to come under challenge from other growing economies, the government can ill afford to be inefficient.n.
n